The historic city of Ipswich might hold the key to a recovery in the Queensland building sector new figures from the state statistician reveal.

The new data also shows how dramatically the size a residential lot Queenslanders are building on has changed as the population continues to grow.

According to the Department of Treasury and Trade, there were more lots approved for development in Ipswich than any other local government area in the state last year, followed by Moreton Bay, Brisbane and Somerset council areas.

Since 2004, the median size of a standard residential block in the top performing local government areas for lot approvals has decreased, on average, by 191 square metres.

Advertisement

So while Ipswich saw a 17 per cent increase in the number of residential lots approved for development in 2012 compared to the previous year, the median lot size was down to 489 from 601 square metres in 2011, and 665 square metres in 2004.

In Brisbane, the median size of suburban house blocks – lots approved for detached dwellings – has slipped from 564 square metres in 2004 to 429 square metres last year.

Economist and former state and federal treasury official Gene Tunny said the slip is in part due to a "maxing out" of space for new suburban housing development in the capital.

Mr Tunny, who writes the Queensland Economy Watch blog and heads the Brisbane office of economics firm Marsden Jacobs, said most of the development growth in Brisbane centred on higher density dwellings.

Just over 36 per cent of new dwellings approved in Brisbane last year were for houses, compared to 91 per cent in Ipswich, 70 per cent in Moreton Bay and 88 per cent in Somerset.

"In some senses, Brisbane is maxed out when it comes to new suburban lot development – supply is diminished – but there is still vast potential for in-fill development and higher density development," Mr Tunny said.

"But there are still a lot of people who want to live on lots with detached suburban houses – classic suburban housing – and you see there's more potential for that in places like Ipswich."

Mr Tunny said the trend was manifest in continued growth at Springfield and a new master-planned community being developed at Ripley Valley.

He said development along these lines could play an important role in the eventual recovery of Queensland's building industry from its current weak condition.

"There are a few good signs in this data – of course everyone is looking for good signs – but it's hard to deny that the growth in projected growth corridors is real, and that's good for the building sector," he said.

"But it is worth noting that building approvals are still much lower than they were before the financial crisis.

"There aren't signs of a full recovery, but there are signs a recovery may be on its way, and where."

18 comments

Building recovery?, what a joke, my building customers have left the industry and become full time workers in the mines. I also like the word "could" in the article. It is all smoke and mirrors to avoid the truth, which is this new LNP government has made the situation worse not better. People have closed their wallets as they may not have a job next week. Slash and burn does not inspire spending.

Commenter

Shane in QLD

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 7:28AM

well it had better happen soon , remember Campbell Newman promised that once elected there would be a building boom in Queensland and employment for all

Commenter

Bob Menzies

Location

Beenleigh

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 8:01AM

So many people believed him too, way too trusting. Didn't fool me but!

Commenter

Stevo16 the dilf

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 9:10AM

Remember Anna was being challenged to bring the unemployment rate down from the 5% threshold to 4%? Why? We have got 6.4% now. Still waiting to see when will we achieve 4%. I hope he won't say we misunderstood him and he meant to add another 4% to general public.

But if you are lucky to know him personally like Michael Caltabiano, you can be assured he can use his discrete power to give you a plum job.http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/sacked-bureaucrat-caltabiano-paid-650000-in-one-year-20130716-2q17z.html

Commenter

4%

Location

The Kingdom (once known as Queensland)

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 9:29AM

@ Stevo16 So you have an intelligent but? At least you wont be the butt of all jokes.

Commenter

Dan

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 9:40AM

re 4%

Was Honest Mike's payout as big as the one Anna got as a bonus when she spat the dummy after leading the ALP to disaster ?

I loathe both of the parties but am more than a little bemused by the very short memories of those who would place Bligh on a pedestal.

Commenter

Teviot Bob

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 5:32PM

It's all well and good for the building industry to get a shot in the arm but it is just a very sad state of affairs that developers are so greedy they are systematically 'killing off' the dream of most families to have a decent size backyard where kids can actually throw a ball or play cricket. There will be whole generations now and to come that will never know what that type of childhood is like. No wonder the obesity levels have risen in children and councils still continue to let developers get away with it.

Commenter

smithers

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 8:07AM

@ smithers

I don't know which particular slice of paradise you grew up in, but in Brisbane, the average suburban block size has almost always been 16 perches, or 405sqm. The idyll of childhood that you are evoking, of sunshine and suburbia,of all the neighbourhood children gathering in a backyard for a lazy afternoon of cricket, then walking barefoot to the local shop for a 5c lemonade and stopping in the local park on the way home to climb a mango tree, all this happened on streets lined with timber houses, spaced at regular 10m intervals.

It wasn't till the mid 60's that the average house block (and the average backyard) started to increase in size. And as a child who grew up in one of these brand new "spacious" subdivisions in the 70's and 80's, I can tell you with confidence, that if anything at all killed the traditional childhood, it was the big backyard.

Every house had enough space for a full 13 on 13 game of footy, but because the houses were so far apart, there were only 9 children in total living within walking distance (half of whom were girls). And forget about walking to the local milkbar. The only corner store within walking distance was over half a kilometer away, and closed down more often than Prisoner went on summer hiatus. It seems that so many big backyards meant that there wasn't enough lemonade money within walking distance to keep the good shopkeep in business.

The fact is, you can fight for your big backyard if you want to. But the truth is, your big backyard killed traditional childhood, and your fight is the fight to keep it dead.

Commenter

hU0N

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 10:45AM

I think the new estates that are being constructed or planned have more parks than older suburbs, nearly every second street has some type of play area or park.

Why maintain a backyard when you can just go to a public park?

Commenter

Tyrone Biggums

Date and time

July 17, 2013, 1:04PM

An average block size of 489 is still pretty large on a global scale. What is worrying is that people are building ever bigger houses on small blocks like this meaning they have almost no garden, This is crazy in a climate like South East Queensland. It also means less space for kids to play outdoors, part of the rising childhood obesity problem. It is also bad because of less space for nature and it makes everywhere hotter in general due to reduced air circulation because buildings are in the way.